Would operation Barbarossa be a success if germany had never had never adopted the nazis genocidal policy's?

except Hitler was exactly right, and his plan worked to perfection.

Literally the only reason Russian people physically exist is because of American "lend-lease"

without lend-lease literally saving the Russian "species", that entire region, and people would be a brief lesson in German childrens school books.

if left totally to their own devices, without a single solitary form of aid from the US or some outside interference like lend-lease, the soviet union and the core of boleshevism would have been extinguished like a small match in a hurricane during the outset of Barbarosa. The Russians were defeated, Ukraine was captured and had it not been for American Lend-lease shipments totaling In total, the U.S. deliveries through Lend-Lease amounted to $11 billion in materials: over 400,000 jeeps and trucks; 12,000 armored vehicles (including 7,000 tanks, about 1,386[37] of which were M3 Lees and 4,102 M4 Shermans);[38] 11,400 aircraft (4,719 of which were Bell P-39 Airacobras)[39] and 1.75 million tons of food

Joseph Stalin, during the Tehran Conference in 1943, acknowledged publicly the importance of American efforts during a dinner at the conference: "Without American production the United Nations [the Allies] could never have won the war.

you sound like a completely un-educated IDIOT when you spew the "HURR HITLER was a bad planner". He defeated the entire west at Dunkirk, and the Soviets before Lend lease artificially supported their effort. He was the Most masterful war planner of all time.

>>confuses glorious mauser with shitty slavshit
The M24 is a Mauser, a re-barrelled G98. Thats probably the funniest thing about that picture.
>I'm sure at least Ukrainians would have joined them.
The Germans only used Ukrainians once they resized they were not going to win. The entire point of Barbarossa was to get dat living space.

>nazis genocidal policy's

You mean like recruiting ethnic minorities as well as Russians to the cause of overthrowing the Soviets?

Is "Communist" suddenly an ethnicity?

I thought Stalin vetoed political groups from being considered targets of genocide when the United Nations defined the term because he didn't want Communism to be declared an inherently genocidal ideology for wanting to liquidate the capitalist class kek

>recruiting ethnic minorities
Starting during mid 1943. And in large numbers from 1944.
They became liberators once they realised they wouldn't be conquerors.

I think he meant things like destroying villages and killing everyone inside for allegedly helping the partisans.
>After the capture of Lviv, a highly contentious and strategically important city with a significant Ukrainian minority, OUN leaders proclaimed a new Ukrainian State on June 30, 1941 and were simultaneously encouraging loyalty to the new regime, in hope that they would be supported by the Germans.
>OUN initially carried out attacks on Polish villages, trying to exterminate Polish populations or expel Polish enclaves from what the OUN fighters perceived as Ukrainian territory.[6] When OUN help was no longer needed, its leaders were imprisoned, and many members were summarily executed.

>during the outset of Barbarosa
You might wan't to look up deliveries by year.
During 1941 they it was a very small amount sent (and mostly from England; Matilda tanks, Hurricanes, etc).
US deliveries were not significant until midway through 1943.

Germany ruled by normal right-wing monarchist would be more successful than Hitler's shitcountry.

>He was the Most masterful war planner of all time.
also he lost

>You mean like recruiting ethnic minorities as well as Russians to the cause of overthrowing the Soviets?
The Russian Free Army was a propaganda lie that didn't actually exist until something like late 1944. Up until then any Soviet that defected to join it just got sent to a concentration camp to die.

>defeated the entire west at Dunkirk

obviously not

he beat them soundly, but failed to finish them and their ragged fleet at Dunkirk.

>LITERALLY FAILED TO DESTROY THE BRITISH ARMY BECAUSE OF FISHING BOATS

lol "lost". Just compared to Russia Alone, if Germany was a person, He came into Russia's home, killed 5 of his family of 7, left the Grandfather alive and one the youngest son, moments before Germany was Shot and critically wounded by the Police, and survived to be sent to trial. But yes "lost"

Hi! Did you get lost? This isn't /pol/

>threw 14 year olds into combat because the army was getting raped so hard by the Soviets
>decades of post-war occupation
>didn't lose

He lost the Battle of Brittain aswell.

He literally Voluntarily left them to escape in humiliation, rather than slaughter. Hitler had forsight into the Post-War world, and desired a climate where the West could be a party whom with he could create the new world order, lead by a victorious Germany. He sought no slaughter of White nations or powers, and proffessed immense respect for their people and nations.

Remind me, who's the mayor of Konigsberg, again? How's the weather in Silesia and Pomerania?

>because the army was getting raped so hard by the Soviets
Thats not the only thing that was raped by the Soviets.

>just ignore the London Blitz, that was just him trying to air-deliver respect

...

>h-he let them out on purpose! h-honest!

The sad part is that despite your bait, stormfags really do believe this.

literally "terror" bombing designed to induce surrender, NOT annihilation. how old are you? You have a highschoolers logic and reasoning skill set.

So he WAS trying to slaughter British civilians, then?

>war aims not achieved
>signs surrender agreement
>government ceases to exist
>territory is split in half and both halves are occupied for decades by former enemies

In what bizarre universe do you live in where this doesn't constitute a loss?

>This avatar fagging as whore tried to defend Hitler """""Grand Strategies""""""
Abandon thread everyone.

>you sound like a completely un-educated IDIOT when you spew the "HURR HITLER was a bad planner"
this, it's one of the worst anti-history memes of all time

I took a class on Nazi Germany leading up to the war and holy fucking shit Hitler was a god damned political genius. And this is without hyperbole. He played the world like a fucking fiddle and got everything he wanted exactly how he planned to. Not just the sumemeland but the moment he reached power he knew exactly what buttons to push on France and Britain while also handling Spain and Italy juggled behind his back. It was amazing to read.

It's a shame it all fell to pieces after 1939, then.

I don't think the mass murder of Jews impaired the success of the campaign, in fact some aspects of the anti-Jewish policies were popular with the local peoples.

You might be hinting at an alleged "Slav genocide", which is however a product of post-war Soviet propaganda that prevails in pop-history to this day

I didn't know 1939 and 1942 were the same year, huh

>invade Poland after Britain and France repeatedly say that they'll declare war on you if you do
>they declare war
>ignore all intelligence estimates about the Russian military and invade that shit anyway
>ignore all intelligence estimates about American production capability and declare war on them anyway
>master planner

You really need to distinguish pre-1939 Hitler from post.

>>ignore all intelligence estimates about American production capability and declare war on them anyway
this is it, he won the rest

beat Britain, France, and Russia single handedly. Like avatar faggot user already said, American production saved Russia and American Soldiers saved the west

But the assertion that its yugoslav ss nd not normal ss is correct.

Not him, but 1939 created the situation that led to his downfall, not 1942. For starters, Hitler rather badly miscalculated the response of France and Britain in regard to his actions in Poland. He certainly didn't expect an easy win in France, without which he's in really deep shit.

He has no means of striking at Britain critically and which has a larger economy (if you count its colonies) to wage a prolonged war against him, to say nothing of the allies it could and eventually did mobilize against Germany. He had already raised his threat profile through his broken treaties and harsh rhetoric that any war against him wouldn't be a quick, limited war in which his operational/tactical strenghts could be converted into political gains.

1939 was a colossal fucking misstep.

Let's be real for a second.

Even without America entering the war (and that's a big thing to assume even without Pearl Harbor,) the odds of successfully pushing past the Urals and finishing Barbarossa decisively were slim to none.

Bonus points for abusing all of the subject peoples that would gladly have joined the fight against communism.

>implying you didn't deserve it

USSR

>10 million women raped by the Wehrmacht

>20 million civilian's killed by the Germans

Germany

>maybe .5 rapes and even thats guesswork

>2 million dead German civilians from all causes throughout the war

>We are the Master race! We will wipe out the inferior races, all will be killed to make room for lebensraum!

>getting destroyed

>muh..muh..muh slavic devils! Eternal Anglo!!!

Germans are the true Snow Niggers.

It started crumbling when he fucked up the declaration of war on Poland. It might not have started coming down hard until after Stalingrad, but the portents were there right at the start of the war.

>Beat Britain

When?

>France,

Something he wasn't sure he could do and certainly hadn't planned on.

>Russia

>Like avatar faggot user already said, American production saved Russia and American Soldiers saved the west

Pic related. American production only started arriving en masse after the German offensive stalled. At best, Germany could get a stalemate, not an outright win.

Hitler repeatedly made the mistake Staline didn't, which is to let people that know better than you lead.
Hitler didn't win against France, Guderian did

Really? Wasnt the sixth army pretty damn close to the vulga? If not for rubble blocking tanks, theyd have secured the city.

I dont think stopping genocide would be a big differance though, because the thefts from the genocide were quite profitable iirc.

...

>muh 100 gorillion tortured soviets
>"I know it from wikipedia!"

Not him, but yes, they were close to the Volga at a single point.

>If not for rubble blocking tanks, theyd have secured the city.

This, however, is completely untrue. The 6th army (as well as most of the rest of AGB) had already been pretty badly depleted just in the open end fighting around the Don basin, nevermind the city itself, where they stalled for literal months before the counterattacks. Tanks, by the way, do very poorly in urban environments, Stalingrad's street fighting was mostly infantry and artillery mixing it up, not airpower.

>muh evil jewish conspiracy to kill 100 gorillion aryans!

>I know it from [insert shitty neo-nazi blog]!

Thefts from the genocide against Jews were profitable. Jews have shit.

Eastern Europeans don't have shit.

And if said Eastern Europeans happen to be from Ukraine or the Baltics, they hate the USSR even more than Germany does.

Also, Stalin got most of his factories east of the Urals. The Wehrmacht stalled outside of Moscow long before US aid came along, so unless the Germans could somehow make it to the Caucasus oil fields, it would be extremely difficult for German logistics to sustain a campaign to finish the war.

Not to mention Lend-Lease started long before the US officially entered the war.

Poorly compared too open fields maybe. Didnt tanks play a key role in pushing into cities on the western front?

No, just poorly in general. Like, if you want to look into Stalingrad in particular, Chuikov's memoirs talk about how he would order the tanks he got disassembled, stick the main guns in windows and other good vantage points, because quite frankly, the disassembled guns were more useful to him than intact tanks. Urban environments rob armor of the mobility that make them useful, and with combat ranges shrunk way down,and much more fire coming around vertically, tanks are vulnerable to all sorts of stuff that they wouldn't have to worry about otherwise.

> Didnt tanks play a key role in pushing into cities on the western front?

I'm unaware of tanks clearing opposition in urban centers in the 1940 war in France, although I suppose it might have happened somewhere, especially as you had the 'floating' unsupported breakthrough post-Sedan, but there was really very little organized resistance behind the main line anyway. If you're talking later war, no, I can't think of a single example where armor was anything more than third fiddle in urban combat, and was usually kept well clear.

Nice strawman

Personally I'd rather both the nazis and the commies get destroyed.

Talk about destroying Europe

>Really? Wasnt the sixth army pretty damn close to the vulga?

Most of the Sixth Army wasn't even in the city, the Stalingrad battlefield was massive.

forgot pic

>letting romanians defend your supply lines

>know that they probably were the weakest part of your line if the Soviets attack in strength
>don't reinforce them

it's his own fault

>pulling your reserves from your flanks to throw them into a meatgrinder in Stalingrad over megalomanian pride when the goal before Barborosa was to cut off the volga to Stalingrad

Yup. You would think they would have used what they learned from beating Russia in WWI to their full advantages.

>Germany bombs British infrastructure
>British respond by terror bombing Berlin
>Hitler like a dumbass gets goaded into terror bombing London as revenge
The Anglo cries out in pain as he strikes you

>Rotterdam says what

This is a really cool pic, thanks for posting.

>That bulge at Tsybenko
At can almost see how they maneuvered against the Russians

>40,000 dead civilians in the blitz

>25,000 dead civilians in dresden

>"OMG NEVER FORGET THE 6 BILLION INNOCENT GERMANS KILLED BY THE EVIL ANGLOS!"

Dresden is the usual suspect for its fame, but it's dishonest to ignore the dozens of other cities that got bombed to shit as well. Hamburg had 42,600 killed, and Germany had at least several in the 10-20k range.

Not to say the Germans (as a government, not the civilians) didn't 'sow the wind' as they say, but don't intentionally ignore the stats for a convenient argument.

Actually a lot of Russians aided the Wehrmacht, called Hiwis. They believed the Nazis aimed to liberate the Russians from Stalin and valiantly volunteered. Hitler's lebensraum ideology was widely unknown outside Germany. Not to forget, the only way the Russians would know lebensraum would have been through the Soviet Union propaganda (which many of them were skeptical of anyways).

In my opinion, Hitler was not genocidal enough. The only way to deal with insurgency is mass murder.

>nazis kill innocent eastern european civilians
>those same civilians help the nazis kill other minorities

Not a single German officer was tried for civilian bombing at Nuremberg, both sides clearly saw it as a justifiable aspect of total war.

they were probably actual Yugos doing the shooting, dude isn't even in a German uniform they did that pretty much everywhere they went during Barbarossa because Slavs hate Jews

>Literally the only reason Russian people physically exist is because of American "lend-lease"

fucking this

>>blitzkrieg their way to Moscow
>>be held off

get fucked, Hitler was insane and told them "nah go get the Caucasus oilfields instead lol" when they were literally in the outer suburbs of Moscow

I spoke with an old polish lady who once told me the Germans didn't harass or mistreat them during the occupation, but it was the Russians who later came raping and pillaging.

based balkanniggers

It's not hard to see why it'd be a can of worms the allies wouldn't want to open given their own behavior. They'd basically be calling their own air staff criminals.

It's very hard to make the argument the allies didn't go in way harder on strategic bombing than the Germans (and nobody saying "If the Germans had the air superiority the allies did they'd have done worse" will change reality).

Oh look it's another 'free-thinking' person with an irrational hatred of Russia and Communism.

Have you seen the size of Russia, really look at the size of a single province and try to imagine how the sum of these enormous and forbidding landmasses could be occupied whilst you're at war with Britain and the US. You're as delusional as your Hitlerboo

Real life is going on. Stoking ethnic tension is surprisingly easy.

Take the hypothetical of if somebody invaded Britain today and told Brits "join up and get those Pakis outta here", you'd definitely find a few volunteers who cared more about that rivalry than the one against the invader.

No, operation Barbarossa was a mistake

Hitler shouldn't invade soviet at first, he should invaded Britain

Pretty much all of Ukraine sided with Hitler

He should have not invaded anyone after France and just stayed put, eventually they would have accepted his acquisitions. He should have invested all his effort into researching nuclear weapons as soon as possible for any possible invasion of Britain or Russia.

dude lmao you are joking right?
at that time hitler should invade britain instead soviet

why?

>near to winter, avoiding russia wild climate
>british morale, by conquering britain, it's just a matter of time the other british colonies will fall too
>Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, a ceasefire agreement between NAZI and Soviet in Poland

then again, hitler was too naive and not using the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact properly

yes, at that ceasefire with soviet, soviet were rushing too their weapon production, but then again German had better weapon production and development at that time then the soviet had

by invading britain, it will be great punch for british morale and it's also for the british coloniies

all weapons, financing, and strategy for war to british colonies was provided by the great britain and by making the fall of great britain, it will be a great punch to hold british colonies

Deep Battle > Blitzkrieg

It is known.

invading britain would have been suicide and a waste of resources destined to end in disaster and would just make it more likely the US would enter the war.

he should have just acted like the war was over for all intents and purposes and carried on as usual. sooner or later the US would have nuclear weapons and unless he had his own nukes, there's not much he can do against that. He should have gone for nukes.

If the Bulgarians had declared war on the USSR along with the rest of the anti-Comintern, would things have looked different?
They had half a million soldiers, a lot of artillery and about a hundred tanks.

>It's very hard to make the argument the allies didn't go in way harder on strategic bombing than the Germans

Well yeah, but it was also the only method the British had to strike at Germany for quite some time. It was also a much more efficient use of manpower than massive ground armies as seen in the East.

It's also important to remember strategic bombing was new. Many of those involved honestly believed they could win the war from the air alone, and if you believe Speer they could have;

>After the war, Speer told American interrogators that a full-out offensive against the synthetic plants by the combined air armadas of England and America—closely spaced raids, night and day, without cease—could [alone] have brought about Germany’s surrenderin eight weeks.”

>He should have not invaded anyone after France and just stayed put, eventually they would have accepted his acquisitions.

Britain was comfortable enough on their island reducing city after city to smoking rubble.

Even if you make the argument Germany could logistically take sustained strategic bombing, you have to consider what the German public (and also factions within the nazi party) would think of a Fuhrer who's sitting on his haunches while Germany gets bombed day after day after day.

Nuclear weapon is just a matter time development, it will always happen because WW2

just like Me-262, it could happened because war
V2 rocket too

again, yes the britain invasion is a good choice at that time because french lost the battle and it's a good a intimidation for british

the war with britain will cost so much money and lives but is the price worth of it??

totally, no one can hold german invade other country. And if the soviet attacked first after the britain invasion and the germans could defend it. It will force soviet to sign another agreement.

His only pre-war goals were the ones handed to him so he would sit quiet and don't make any trouble. If he had been a tad smarter, he wouldn't have declared war on the entire world. His goals were so far-fetched and retarded that they were bound to be gigantic fuck-ups.

>the britain invasion is a good choice
See: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea_Lion_(wargame)

What if Hitler had dummied an invasion of Poland, pulled out at the last second, letting Russia invade alone? That surely would have forced the Allies to declare war on Russia? Otherwise, at worst, they'd make their protection treaties worth nothing and at best leave them with egg on their face?

>Pretty much all of Ukraine sided with Hitler
Source?

Are you autistic?
>Germany lost everything they had gained before and half of their own territory
>Prussia got dismantled
and
>Their entire regime got destroyed
You have to be legit braindead to call that a victory

>>REEEEEE you can't help your allies that's cheating
really made me think

If Germany was a person, that person got shot, his wife beaten, his wristwatch stolen, and his daughter deflowered while bent over on his corpse.

Did operation barbossa good too? no of course, but the again, the achivement of british invasion is more more important than the soviet one

>why?

british had british colonies and their order of war is desentralized type which mean it will cripple all threat from british side power

british is one of major power that really really oppose Axis, even the balkan can't into the war without allied campaign and help

british had role major in north africa for holding Axis

and remember even the murrica can't war until pearl harbour, they were still sending some supply and weapons to europe forl allied even though they now the deep sea u boat in atlantic because there were still brit

also

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea_Lion_(wargame)

that's what they said with maginot line

>what if ireland get invaded?
>there was still Battle of Atlantic